SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Raj) 2883

P.K. LOHRA
Anju Devi – Appellant
Versus
Trilochan Prasad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Dron Kaushik, Adv., Surendra Thanvi, Adv., Sanjeet Purohit, Adv.

JUDGMENT

P K Lohra, J. - By the instant revision petition, petitioner-objector has challenged order dated 21st of December,2018 passed by Addl. District Judge, Raisinghnagar (for short, 'learned executing Court') in Execution Case No.35/15. By the order impugned, learned executing Court has rejected objections of the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 36 and Section 47 CPC.

2. The facts, in brief, are that respondent-decree-holders filed a suit for specific performance of contract against third respondent Girish Kumar pertaining to shop No.62 measuring 20 x 40.5 sq.ft. at Raisinghnagar. The agreement to sale was executed by third respondent Girish Kumar on the strength of Will dated 5th of January,2009 executed in his favour by his grandfather Onkarmal. During pendency of the suit, the parties entered into compromise and on the strength of compromise, the suit was decreed. When the decree was put to execution, on behalf of petitioner, objections were filed under Section 47 read with Order 21 Rule 36 CPC. In the application, the petitioner averred that shop in question was not exclusively owned by Onkarmal inasmuch as his two sons Purshottam and Leeladhar were having 1/3rd share each in t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top